R v Wayne Steven Bishop
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Maddison |
| Judgment Date | 27 May 2011 |
| Neutral Citation | [2011] EWCA Crim 1446 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | Case No. 201102123/A3 |
| Date | 27 May 2011 |
[2011] EWCA Crim 1446
Mr Justice Maddison
Mr Justice Sweeney
Case No. 201102123/A3
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2A 2LL
Mr I Wise QC & Mr R Posner appeared on behalf of the Appellant
On 25th February 2011 in the Crown Court at Nottingham the appellant, Wayne Steven Bishop, who is 33 years old, pleaded guilty to a count of dangerous driving. On 10th March he pleaded guilty to a count of burglary on rearraignment and on 11th April he was sentenced by His Honour Judge Sampson to serve 4 months' imprisonment for the burglary and 4 months consecutively for the dangerous driving. He was also disqualified for a period of 3 years and until thereafter he had passed an extended driving test. He appeals against sentence by leave of the single judge.
There were three co-accused, all of whom also pleaded guilty to the burglary. Robert Frederick Wheelhouse, 39 years of age, received 4 months' imprisonment. Paul Andrew Sears, 30 years of age, received a suspended sentence order, comprising 5 months' imprisonment suspended for 12 months with a requirement of unpaid work. Daniel Jason Staples, 24, also received a suspended sentence order, in his case comprising 4 months' imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, with a requirement of unpaid work.
The facts can be shortly stated. In the early hours of the morning of 2nd September 2010 the appellant drove a Transit van with his three co-accused in it from Nottingham to the clubhouse of Mansfield Rugby Club. The three co-accused alighted from the van and broke into the club through a rear door. The premises were searched but all that was ultimately stolen was a quantity of chocolate.
The alarm at the club was activated and police officers attended at the scene. They found Staples hiding in undergrowth nearby, in possession of two balaclavas and a burglar's kit which included bolt croppers and a crowbar. He also had on him a two-way radio. Wheelhouse was also found nearby. Other police officers came across the Transit van nearby and approached it. The appellant was in the driving seat and Sears was a passenger. The appellant manoeuvred the van forwards and backwards several times, narrowly missing a police officer and coming into contact with a police vehicle before making his escape. The van drove off, reaching but not exceeding speeds of 50 miles per hour and police officers were in pursuit. During the pursuit the appellant passed through two sets of red traffic lights. He eventually drove into, doubtless unwittingly, a dead end and was arrested. The chase had extended over a distance of some two-and-a-half miles.
This was by no means the first occasion on which the appellant had appeared before the criminal courts. He had made 14 previous court appearances and had served three previous short prison sentences. He had not previously been convicted either of burglary or of dangerous driving, but he had been convicted of one offence of theft, no less than six of driving whilst disqualified and he had been before the court for breaches of community orders on three previous occasions.
The judge had a pre-sentence report recommending a community order with various conditions. The report expressed the view that there was a medium risk of the appellant's re-offending. His child care commitments made him unsuitable for unpaid work. The report recorded that he lived with his five children but that his ex-partner cared for the children two nights a week and at weekends. The report also said that according to the appellant, his ex-partner would care for the children should he be given a custodial sentence though the appellant was worried about the further disruption that this could bring to the children's lives.
Passing sentence, the judge described this as a planned expedition to carry out a commercial burglary. Suitable premises had been targeted and tools had been taken with them. They had driven some distance in the appellant's van and in those circumstances custodial sentences were inevitable. The judge's starting point in respect of the burglary was that in the event of the trial, a sentence of 6 months' imprisonment would have been appropriate.
The appellant's situation was aggravated by the way in which he had driven in an attempt to get away after he had been discovered. The judge observed, as have we, that the appellant had failed previously to comply...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Christiana Boakye and Others
...of children. He relies on Article 3(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and on the decisions in R v Bishop [2011] EWCA Crim 1446 and R (HH) v Westminster City Magistrates' Court [2011] EWHC 1145 (Admin). 12 We have reached the very clear conclusion that those subm......
-
RT v The Circuit Court in Tarnobrzeg, Poland
...relating to children. 43 We have not been shown any example where the child of a parent being sentenced was represented. R v Bishop [2011] EWCA Crim 1446 is a striking example of an appeal where the sentencing court had failed to make any inquiries into what would happen to the offender's c......
-
HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa
...Civ 1151, [2001] 1 WLR 2002, per Lord Phillips MR at para 79; R v Mills [2002] EWCA Crim 26, [2002] 2 Cr App R(S) 229; R v Bishop [2011] EWCA Crim 1446 and see also the South African case of M v The State [2007] ZACC 18. The Court in Norris did not have to consider the special rights of ......
-
R v Petherick (Rosie Lee)
...include Franklyn (1981) 3 Cr App R(S) 65 Vaughan (1982) 4 Cr App R(S) 83, Mills [2002] 2 Cr App R (S) 229, and more recently Bishop [2011] EWCA Crim 1446 and, perhaps most recently in Kayani; Solliman [2011] EWCA Crim 2871, [2012] 1 Cr App R 197 where, in the contextOf child abduction, th......
-
When is a Courier Not a ‘Mule’?
...drug importation offences were set down by R v Aramah as amended by R v Aranguren [1999] Cr App R (S)347. 5 [2001] 1 Cr App R 307.6 [2011] EWCA Crim 1446.7 [2011] EWHC 1145 (Admin).8 [1999] 2 Cr App R (S) The Journal of Criminal Law way of guidelines or otherwise, were not intended to and d......